skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That's a fair point, but it's not a counter to my argument. There is nothing whatsoever about today's copyright law that stops someone from funding completely new works using alternative business models and giving those works away such that they can be freely distributed. If there are alternative business models that really are as effective as copyright or more so in incentivising the creation and distribution of useful works, why aren't we seeing vast amounts of such work, funded by such alternative models, in the age of the Internet?

That's pretty easy - the return for the creator is higher with copyright than without. Hence, in the current system, there is no incentive for alternative models to really develop (outside of some niches --- software is maybe a limited counterexample, with licences like the GPL demonstrating what might happen if copyright did not exist). Also, your argument does not take into account the fact that without copyright derivative works would be utilized to a much fuller extent.
Thanks for the link. I may use Phabricator just so I have an excuse to dig through the rest of the docs. :) Well, that and it looks like it could be quite useful.
; <<>> DiG 9.8.3-P1 <<>> t.co
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 30304
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;t.co.	IN	A

;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
co.	803	IN	SOA	ns1.cctld.co. hostmaster.neustar.biz. 2012499915 900 900 604800 86400

;; Query time: 37 msec
;; SERVER: 8.8.8.8#53(8.8.8.8)
;; WHEN: Mon Oct 8 02:04:19 2012
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 90
Capuchin Monkeys Reject Unequal Pay
Sale Bottle Cages
I find my Twitter useless now (although I can still copy links). It's amazing to see how Twitter has become my information/discovery network. I use Facebook just to browse pictures and other casual stuff shared by my friends/family.

Twitter can kill Flipboard and other tons of "discovery engines" with one flip. I think Twitter has figured out this stuff couple of years back and that's what they are doing. A real-time discovery network. It is more powerful than any of the existing old mediums, be it newspapers or TV networks.

EDIT: It also makes extremely powerful advertising medium.
Hacker News, mostly. And Word-of-mouth.
Stanford's online class: Introduction to Computer Networks
I signed for their mailing list when Source Sans Pro was released because they had a sneak preview of Source Code on the announcement page, and I was intrigued at the look.

I switched to Source Code on the day it was released, and it takes a short while to get used to (like everything new). It is a decent font and it wears well on you.

While we are talking fonts, Source Sans Pro, their other proportional font family is also equally good. Give it a try, for documents and other editing purposes (browser font works well for me :-) ).

http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcesans.adobe/
Getting useful C++ exception information from Visual Studio
sudo echo "199.59.148.12 t.co" >> /etc/hosts
If virus scanners were common on unices, their primary purpose would be to watch for the string "rm -rf".
The internets are broken, again
Twitter URL shortener domain t.co is down.
"Antitrust harm" is not limited to consumers, you can prove harm to competitor businesses as well to qualify a lawsuit.
Can you explain why a patronage model is unable to solve these problems?
In a keyboard-less future, what happens to all the writers?
What's a modern libc? Not being snide or anything: I have no idea. I didn't know where to look so I looked at glibc [1] and that, in fact, does seem to be how it works.

[1] http://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=blob;f=string/strcm...
Line 98:
if( hasWebGL === false || hasWebRTC === false )	return;

But that line is not in the body of a function. What it looks like the author meant to do is have an if/else block to check if your current browser has WebGL AND WebRTC.

http://caniuse.com/#search=webgl
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebRTC#Browsers
Surprisingly good advice, but often ignored. :-)
As far as I can tell from the abstract (the rest is behind a paywall) this study will not help in the question of causality. By such studies we can not tell whether

violent games -> aggressive behaviour

or just, which probably no one will take into doubt,

aggressive behaviour -> violent games.

So, nothing new to see here.
It's also listed in Spamhaus http://www.spamhaus.org/dbl/removal/record/t.co - so it could be someone's filter going nuts over that.

Funny recommendation there:

"If you are an authoritative administrator of t.co and you have solved the abuse issues you can write to us at dbl-mmxi@spamhaus.org from either abuse@t.co or postmaster@t.co and inform us of the actions you have taken to clean up the current spammer URLs. Please also inform us of any steps you have taken to prevent future abuse of your shortener/redirector. We will review your request and, at our discretion, remove the listing or respond to your request."

:)
Good question. I host stuff on free blogs like Tumblr these days. I am not sure if a full-blown domain name is as valuable to me as it was in the past.
Jesus, white people are ugly.
If it's going to be owned by your non-root account, shouldn't it be installed to ~/? It seems like a bad idea for a non-root user to have control over binaries that are in root's $PATH.
consumers are incentives to take the survey to see premium content - I didn't see anything about micro payments.
When a HN twitter bot has tweeted this story, I actually clicked on the link.

Genius.
Are you being deliberately obtuse? The reason prospective parents trying to conceive are told to keep a "positive mental attitude" is because it can be a long, frustrating process, and it doesn't help if you're too frustrated to want sex.
I find off-white a little easier to read, but the sheer amount of light emanating from a large screen anywhere near white irritates my eyes more so than the strain of reading slightly fuzzy fonts.
Hope you enjoy. I'll be adding an archive of the weekly playlists so people can check them out before subscribing.
I used this once and was really happy with the results. I think there's a little bit of an opportunity bias which good statisticians would have issues with, but for some useful imperfect numbers I think it's a good solution.

Also, this is a pretty new tool.
JSMin with sourcemaps
Loser-pays is a non-starter in a country like the US that uses private civil litigation to enforce everything from workplace racial discrimination laws to environmental regulation.

Honestly, if you study the system a little bit, at least in the US, the problem isn't too much litigation, it's too little litigation. E.g. people complain about all the medical malpractice suits, but a Harvard Medical School study a few years ago suggested that far more people with meritorious claims failed to file suit than the number of people with unmeritorious claims who did file suit. There are tons of meritorious environmental law suits that don't get filed because polluted communities either don't realize they can sue or don't want to take on a big corporation.

"Loser pays" really favors big companies and the status quo, and in the absence of a big pro-active government to vindicate peoples' rights really results in those big companies trampling on those rights.
The article was about copyright which protects original works of authorship, not patents which protect inventions.

Every investor asks how defensible is your company. For certain products: drugs, microprocessors, and countless other capital intensive products patents protection is one of the important mechanisms for defending marketshare.

For example, it takes tens of millions of dollars to design a new drug and get it through trails. If competitors could just copy it as soon as it was released, the company that did the original work could not recoup its R&D costs and would eventually go broke. Without patent protection, no one would invest in companies that designed new drugs and innovation would stagnate.

Copyright provides a defense mechanism for creative companies like Disney. Again, it takes tens (to hundreds) of millions of dollars to develop a movie. If anyone could just copy it and sell it, Disney would could not recoup its production costs. No one would buy Disney stock. Creative expression would stagnate.

Are there problems with the current patent and copyright laws? Yes.

But the fundamental protections they were intended to provide are still necessary for innovation and creation to flourish in a market economy.
JSMin with sourcemaps (grunt flavor)
This type of market research was previously only accessible to companies that could drop 10k or more on these surveys. This tool will help entrepreneurs validate ideas they were unable to test because it was cost prohibitive.
But those (or similar) communities existed long before Facebook did - they serve a vertical of common interests, rather than a horizontal of people you know. Some of them might be replaced by Facebook groups, but plenty of them will and can continue to exist outside of Facebook.

For any kind of specialized discussion on computer stuff and startups, I'll take a bunch of perfect strangers on HN over friends on Facebook any day. On the other hand, posting pics of my new apartment or from my holiday would be (let's say) underappreciated here. On the other hand, people I share friendship or family ties with cares about this stuff, even if we have no interests relevant to the matter in common.
It's not a matter of assigning blame, it's a matter of not delivering a shitty service to your customers.
I have heard of musl[1] and Bionic[2]. Interested in hearing about any others.

[1] http://www.musl-libc.org/

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bionic_(software)
I never said there should be a lookup system. Where are you seeing that? I said there isn't one and people still manage to get by. The other commenter was suggesting looking up addresses was some sort of problem. I'm saying it's a non-issue. If not having a public name-to-email lookup was a show stopper, then we would not be having this discussion because email would not be popular. People get by just fine without lookup. They exchange addresses and store addresses on their own.

Discussion is great. But you have to read carefully to understand what's being said. (If I am not being clear, then I apologize.) But if your mind is closed then there's no point reading what I'm typing because I am not regurgitating the usual ideas on email.

Anwyay, discussion is irrelevent when juxtaposed against running code. I'm interested in stuff that works more than getting approval from people in online forums.

This is not some new thing. Anyone can use email this way now. We all have good connections and bandwidth. There is no need for store and forward. What has stood in the way of using email as direct communication is people who can only see email being used one way: daemons that accept commands from any connection, spoofed IP's and all, and email as a service run by someone else, not a small program on the client's machine. If it was impossible to authenticate connections based on any other means besides real-time challenge-response, or DNS run by someone else, then how would people manage to run ssh daemons without the same problems as email?
Great points.

I'd also add that if anything copyright has left us poorer because it promotes software and other content that doesn't permit free-riding. GNU/Linux and BSD probably would have occurred much sooner and become the dominant platform in the world if copyright had not afforded Microsoft the money to spend on every which way to compete besides simply building a better product.
I wish I could know, whether he tried moving slow and make things less brittle.
I would disagree with item 3. I am a professional developer. Not remotely professional, but flat-out professional. And I make mistakes. I know other developers, wait, greater than remotely professional developers, that also make mistakes. Even though I'm a professional developer and I've got a careful map of the code in my head, and I'm careful not to make mistakes, I still make mistakes. I've seen other developers do the same thing - make mistakes. I'm always stunned, but it keeps happening. I have found that type hints, code completion, intellisense, helps me discover mistakes sooner, often before I make them. I have found that mistakes found sooner are cheaper to fix. Type hints have huge value for productivity. Often, BTW, you are using a class (or JS function, whatever) that you didn't write, so you don't necessarily have this careful map in your head, your trying to figure out what this beast is that you're using, and hints are extremely helpful there.
I think Typescript is great, from what I see so far. And it's not like Anders is trying to hijack JS. I see it as a development tool. If the next guy doesn't want to use TypeScript, fine, have at the JS, it's nice code that it produces.
So for $110 I could run my own presidential election poll?

Hmmmmm.

No, wait. Targeting is 50 cents a person, not 10. So it would be about $550. Still, though.
Computer Systems: A Programmer's Perspective by Bryant and O'Hallaron might be a good resource. It also covers things like assembly code and caching that you might not be interested in, but its a solid introduction to the low level details on how computers work. Its used in my university (and many others) in the Introduction to Computer Systems course.
i have avoided being in photos at public events for this very reason for the past two years - it's really not that hard to avoid - more of a habit at this point
Since you can google from your addressbar in the browser I see normal users only use Google. Instead of typing www.example.com they type 'example website' and then reach it through Google (or Bing depending on their browser).

I think it's still of value to have a good domain name, in the end there will be a big subset of users who will use it to reach your website. If you're running a webshop on the domain this could be damaging if they land on one of you competitors and get the product they want with them.
The Constitution was written long before copyright and patent were put on sound economic footing.
The SEC has been demoralized, and defunded for a long time. While people argue regulatory capture, its only a small part.

There are other things most people don't know about the street habits and saves - sort of like the hidden rules of your favorite language.

Firstly - The SEC is also working to improve. In 2009 they got their new head of enforcement Robert Khuzami - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Khuzami

Read his wikipedia page, and his case history, this is the kind of person who you Want fighting for you.

--------------

Secondly
Rituals: Most industries over time identify patterns and streamline them, but for outsiders they would be arcane. Mathbabe, the ex finance girl who decided to leave finance for something, should already know this.

For the rest of us:

The SEC has x resources - so they pick and choose cases that they know they have a bullet proof case for.

AS a result, when its announced that the SEC is investigating you, most Wall Street firms know that they are in trouble. (OTOH most normal people would think its just an investigation, not the announcement of a verdict )

At this point, all firms know they have a call to make - Fight it out, or cave.

* Almost Everyone goes to the negotiating table.

The thing most firms want is to plea bargain, and then get a statement where they accept whatever fine they have to accept, while never having to publicly admit to wrong doing.

Thats the ritual

------

In 2010, there was 1 firm which decided it had the stones to go against the grain - Goldman Sachs.

It was hilarious - the disparaging comments here are praise compared to what Fox news and GS churned out.

The SEC is clueless and dumb, filled with people who couldn't make it in finance. The SEC is a lap dog of the Govt. etc etc.

IIRC the CEO even went on record expressing his confidence on having the case thrown out.

The SEC won and GS paid the largest fine (in the SEC's history AFAIK) of $550 million.

The next day the news papers were crowing about how the fine is only a blip on the radar a days fluctuation on the stock market.

The guy who prosecuted the case, the head of the SEC

----

Also please note the author of the article is reading a book and has recently reached the section which discusses regulatory capture, and is particualrly incensed by it.
>You can cite a lobbyist who actually claimed that without copyright, there was no way for any artist to make money? Or that with free sharing, no-one at all would spend money on entertainment? Or that no-one at all creates new art without the financial incentive?

I'll grant you that the phrasing of the 'myths' on the site is more absolute than is generally used by copyright proponents, but the arguments are extremely common with minor qualifiers, e.g. that free sharing causes an extraordinarily large (albeit not 100%) reduction in the amount that people spend on entertainment (see generally http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/how-copyright-industries-con-...), and (most importantly) the counterarguments still apply to the less absolute versions of the argument more commonly encountered in the wild.

>If there are alternative business models that really are as effective as copyright or more so in incentivising the creation and distribution of useful works, why aren't we seeing vast amounts of such work, funded by such alternative models, in the age of the Internet?

There is an extent to which we are. See: YouTube, github, etc.

But a big piece of the trouble is that if you take any given business model, chances are the artist can make at least trivially more money by exercising some of the control the copyright monopoly provides over the work. And if copyright exists, why not do that? The consequence is that most business models are seen to involve copyright, even if they would work very nearly as well without it.

More than that, a large part of the benefit of not having copyright accrues to content consumers rather than producers. The argument is that the benefit consumers gain exceeds the benefit producers lose, i.e. that no copyright is only slightly worse for producers and vastly better for consumers, and the benefit producers lose is insufficient to significantly impact the number and quality of works produced.

That content producers can't actually be better off without copyright is of course necessarily the case for the reason you point out. If a situation arises where not having the rights granted under the copyright act is better for the content producer, the content producer can just license the rights to whoever he likes and be in the identical position as there would be with no copyright. So eliminating copyright wouldn't create any benefit for the content producer that they can't already obtain (ignoring for a moment that content producers are often simultaneously content consumers, e.g. when they produce derivative works). But that explains the lack of examples of content producers adopting non-copyright business models: They're the ones under copyright who decide whether to authorize alternative business models, but they aren't the ones who derive the bulk of the benefit from them. The argument is instead that the non-derivative content producers fail to experience a harm sufficient to outweigh the harm that copyright causes to the producers of derivative works and to consumers.
You know what else is "counter-intuative"? The heliocentric world view. Also, relativity.

Imagine, if before Einstein, you put 20 smart people in a room and tell them to come up with ideas about mass and energy. None of them would...well, you get the idea.

Look, I'm not saying that copyright is all that. I'm just saying that if you want to argue against it, you need to find a basis MUCH more intelligent than the one you've selected, because if there's one thing that science has demonstrated about the world, it's that the intuitive thing is often wrong, and sometimes spectacularly so.
Seems to be back up: https://t.co/uHJO6BCr
Looper Theatrical Commentary Track
In my experience, most babies are pretty ugly the first couple of weeks. Once they get some fat on them they usually get plenty cute.
Why are glasses so expensive?
I'm wondering if it is possible to use the equivalent of SEO techniques to always have your résumé read/selected, e.g. include a verbatim copy of the original job add as a small print footer on the résumé. This means that all the keywords from the job ad should lead that résumé to be selected for further investigation.
Am I supposed to be mad at twitter for forcing me to use their unreliable link shortener?

How is this any different from the countless times twitter.com was down?

It's a centralized service, things happen.
They've had them all along. Didn't stop them from getting to where they are. Why should they start caring now? From a cost/benefit perspective, it is probably not worth it to them to do whatever is needed to have a six nines uptime.
Louis Vuitton Purses Is Selling Hot
I don't know why any Silicon Valley entrepreneurs would put their faith Mitt Romney -- the guy who thinks Tesla Motors is a "loser" company, doesn't support net neutrality, demanded mandatory porn filters on computers (http://techcrunch.com/2012/07/24/could-romney-really-ban-por...), and is from a party that rabidly opposes immigration, science research, and science education. If the GOP candidate were a libertarian, I would understand, but what I don't get from this article is what Romney could possibly offer Silicon Valley other than the hand-wavy "business background".
I can see how Twitters length-limit led to external link shorteners, but once they took it in-house, why expose it? Why not just say that a link (of any length) "costs" n characters, and handle the shortening/expansion on the backend? What is the benefit of exposing the mechanism?
You might want to look at the non-generic implementations, like http://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=blob;f=sysdeps/x86_...
Probably best to throw any science under the bus if it's going to get in the way of normal grown ups simulating mass murder.
The big trouble with Inconsolata for me is the lack of a bold weight. This means it doesn't work in emacs if you use bold with your font lock mode.
Facebook was Mark Zuckerburg's 3rd company. His second, Synapse Media Player, was a machine-learning-based music player that got 7-figure buyout offers from Microsoft and AOL when Zuckerburg was 17.
...would love to see a comparison like this http://1overn.com/2011/01/31/iterating-on-font-pair-comparis... Consolasa vs Adobe Source Code Pro and also with Inconsolata (though for now I'm using Adobe's font simply for the fact that in sublime text 2 on xubuntu lts both Consolas and Inconsolata render as white squares instead of letters - couldn't figure out it's some weird encoding issue or dog knows what, as in other apps it works great)
This is one of the reasons that Apple switched from the PowerPC to Intel.

After a bit of browsing on Wikipedia and Freescale product pages, it appears to me that the mobile G4 chips typically used under 20 watts and had TDPs around 30. That's in line with (or below) the standard-power Intel chips found in the Macbook Pro from its introduction to current Ivy Bridge models.

There was also a low-power G5 processor that could, in theory have powered a laptop. Apple didn't go that route because it wasn't substantially (if any) faster than the G4, there wasn't a suitable northbridge, and the G5's idle power consumption was too high.

It appears Apple switched to Intel because there wasn't a suitable upgrade path for its laptops, not because then-current models consumed too much power or generated too much heat.
Weird. And sad. I like HN. I don't suppose anyone else will see this.